Appeal No. 1997-2941
Application 08/165,318
with respect to Table 1 and the various channels is not
understood. The eight channels all carry different data
intended for different speakers (Table 1, col. 6; figure 7).
It is not known why the Examiner considers the data in two
channels to be the same (FR3, first full para.) since they
carry different data. There is no reason to believe that the
"Right/Center" channel in area "A" carries identical
information to the "Left/Center" channel in area "C."
Nevertheless, even if the data was the same, the claim
requires the parameter to be doubly written in different
recording areas, not the data, and, again, Kohut does not
disclose redundant encoding parameters or recording redundant
encoding parameters in different digital audio data recording
areas. Accordingly, the Examiner has failed to establish a
prima facie case of anticipation. The anticipation rejection
of claims 1, 7, and 9 is reversed.
35 U.S.C. § 103
The Examiner states that Kohut discloses the claimed
subject matter except, perhaps, "a parameter by which said
audio reproduction data is encoded," but that this limitation
is "clearly disclosed by Fujiwara" (EA9). The Examiner
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007